.393 

/tsx 



E 429 
.B43 
Copy 1 



SPEECH 



•^ 



HON. JOHN BELL, OF TENN., 



ON THE SUBJECT OP 



tf 



lO 






NON-INTERVENTION. 






\ 



DELIVERED 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, APRIL 13, 1852 



^ 



WASHINGTON: 

GIDEON AND CO., PRINTERS, 
1852. 



SPEECH. 



Mr. BELL said: 

Mr. President, 1 cannot but feel some embarrassment in proceeding to 
address the Senate after what has just transpired; and I regret exceedingly 
to find myself in a position which seems to require that I should speak on 
this subject at all, when so many measures of urgent interest and importance 
seem to demand the prompt attention of the Senate. Nevertheless, this 
day having been assigned for the consideration of the resolutions just an- 
nounced from the Chair, with the indulgence of the Senate I beg leave to 
proceed. 

Some question has been made as to my views upon the resolutions offered 
by the honorable Senator from Rhode Island, (Mr. Clarke.) I am not 
so vain, sir, as to suppose it of any public importance that I should state 
what my views are; but still I choose to avail myself of the courtesy usually 
extended to Senators on such occasions, and, moreover, to exercise the com- 
mon privilege of Senators to express their views freely on any question 
which they may deem of sufficient importance, and which may appear to 
be pertinent to the duties and powers of Congress. 

I am aware, sir, that this subject has lost much of its freshness — still more 
of its attraction, by the discussion which it has already received, and more 
particularly by the abatement of the excitement which existed in the coun- 
try previously to the introduction of the resolutions by the honorable Sena- 
tor from Rhode Island. Still, I am of opinion that the subject has lost 
none of its intrinsic importance by the lapse of time, or by the consideration 
it has already received; nor, in my judgment, has it yet been discussed in 
all its more interesting connexions and bearings; and it is for the purpose, 
chiefly, of expressing my views upon several aspects of the general ques- 
tion, which other gentlemen do not appear to have thought of sufficient in- 
terest to present, that I have risen to-day. 

I wish it to be understood, in the outset, that I do not propose to occupy 
ihe time allotted to me on this occasion, by noticing particularly the argu- 
ments of gentlemen who have preceded me. I am aware that it might, 
perhaps, be expected of me to take some notice of the strictures of the hon- 
orable Senator from Louisiana, not now present, (Mr. Soule,) upon the 
course of the Administration in relation to the Cuban invasion, the officious 
intermeddling of the British Government in that affair, and the circum- 
stances under which the Spanish consul returned to New Orleans. Sir, 
while I doubt not that the policy and proceedings of the Administration in 
relation to those transactions are susceptible of a very satisfactory explana- 



tion, yet I shall leave to others — who may be more familiar with all the 
circumstances of these transactions than I am, and to whom it may he more 
convenient, the task of elucidating, and of deducing from them the just 
vindication of the Executive. 

I desire, further, to be understood, as not attaching very much importance 
to the question so earnestly debated — after all that has transpired in rela- 
tion to this subject — whether the resolutions offered by the honorable Sen- 
ator from Rhode Island shall be adopted, if adopted at all, without amend- 
ment; or whether we may not incorporate with them some expression of 
the opinions entertained by the country of the intervention of Russia in the 
affairs of Hungary. While it gives me pleasure to acknowledge that no 
member of this body is more distinguished for his good sense, for his sound, 
practical, statesmanlike views upon any question he chooses to investigate 
than the Senator from Rhode Island ; and while I admit that his resolutions 
embrace every sentiment which I think important for this country to declare 
in connexion with the Hungarian question; nevertheless, I mean to say that 
1 do not lay the same stress that others have done upon the question, 
whether the resolutions shall pass in the shape in which they now stand, or 
whether they shall be so amended as to declare, in fitting and proper terms, 
the sentiment of the country upon the practical question of intervention in 
the case presented between Russia and Hungary. In my view of the sub- 
ject, if Congress, entertaining the opinion that any important principle of 
international law has been violated by the' intervention of Russia in the 
affairs of Hungary, should deem it expedient to express the concern with 
which the people of this country had witnessed that intervention, and even 
to protest and remonstrate against any future and similar violation of the 
law of nations, in temperate yet firm language, I do not consider that such 
a proceeding would disturb the amicable relations existing between the two 
countries. I hold that such a proceeding on the pari of the United States 
would be no just cause of offence to any foreign Power, nor any violation 
of national courtesy. Indeed, sir, there may be some danger that, in our 
caution to avoid one extreme, we may fall into the opposite one; for, while 
I agree that neither sound policy, nor a just regard for our own character 
and dignity, nor u due respect, for any foreign nation with whom we desire 
to cultivate relations of amity and commerce, do not warrant or justify the 
employment of the language of invective, of menace, or bravado, in pro- 
testing or remonstrating against any actual or supposed aggression by any 
one nation upon the rights of any other nation or people, yet there is a wide 
difference between such forbearance in language, between a firm yet tempe- 
rate expression of our opinions and sentiments, and the tameness and sub- 
missive acquiescence which might be implied from absolute silence, w^hen 



we conceive that there has been a violation of any great conservative prin- 
ciple of that system of international law, the boast of modern civilization, 
which has, by common consent, been adopted to secure the equal and 
independent rights of the weaker and smaller States as well as of the 
stronger and more powerful among the family of nations. 

I have thrown out these suggestions rather to maintain the right of any 
one nation to take exception, by protest or remonstrance, to the acts or con- 
duct of any other power conceived to be an infraction of the lav/ of nations, 
without being necessarily committed to any other or forcible intervention 
to compel its observance, than with any view to the exercise of the right on 
the present occasion. For myself, 1 am quite content with the resolutions 
as they were presented by the Senator from Rhode Island. If it were im- 
portant, or proper, or expedient to add to the resolutions, as originally pre- 
sented, by declaring our sympathy with the fortunes of Hungary, or to pro- 
test against any future intervention by Russia in the affairs of that gallant 
people, I am not prepared to say that either the amendment offered by the 
Senator from Michigan, (Mr. Cass.) or by the Senator from ISew York, 
(Mr. Seward,) is in a form which could receive my assent. The language 
of the amendment offered by th^ Senator from New York I consider de- 
cidedly objectionable. 

But I do not propose to examine the question whether there has been 
any violation of any great conservative principle of the law of nations by 
Russia — whether the interference of that Power, upon the invitation of Aus- 
tria, with the affairs of Hungary, a dependent kingdom of the Austrian 
empire, was such a violation ; nor do I propose to go into the discussion of 
what may be the true interpretation of the law of nations, as to the ques- 
tion how far one nation may be allowed to interfere in the internal affairs 
of another, when its own safely or interest may seem to require such inter- 
vention. It is enough to say that, whatever may be the rule of interna- 
tional law, the practice of nations, as shown by all history, is — and, sir, it 
ever will be — that, whenever any great Power considers that either its own 
safety, interest, or the success of its ambitious schemes, suggest the policy of 
intervention in the affairs of other nations, it will not hesitate to interfere. 
It may be said with truth of the law of nations, as it has been said of mu- 
nicipal law, in certain conditions of society and government, that it is too 
often found to be a dead letter, when great criminals are to be brought to 
justice. Sir, it is a principle of international lav/ that no nation has a right 
to wage war against another nation without just cause; and yet more than 
nine-tenths of the wars which have afflicted the world, even in modern 
times, have had no other foundation, or pretext, than the spirit of con- 
quest, the love of glory, or of spoil. 



It will be perceived, sir, from the tenor of these introductory remarks ; 
that I have not risen to continue the discussion upon the subject of the 
policy of intervention or non-intervention by the United States in the affairs 
or quarrels of Europe. It is not a question of intervention or non-interven- 
tion, then, theoretical or practical; it is not the cause of bleeding Hungary, 
nor of her highly-gifted though over-zealous and presumptuous chief, (Kos- 
suth,) who no sooner set his foot upon our shores than he commenced to teach 
us the true interpretation of international law, and to give us lessons upon the 
moral duties of our position in the great family of nations; nor is it the cause 
of liberty in Europe, or of human rights in general; nor is it the question 
as to what is to be the fate of Europe, or the consequences of recent changes, 
or the present condition of affairs on that continent upon its future destiny, 
however interesting such questions or inquiries may be, that I avail myself 
of the privilege of addressing the Senate. 

My purpose is to call the attention of the Senate and of the country, so 
far as I may be able by my humble voice, to another question, to another 
and far different inquiry, suggested by the resolutions under consideration, 
and fairly embraced within their scope. That inquiry is, how are we to 
be affected, how is this continent to be effected, how is the New World to 
be affected, by the recent changes and present condition of affairs in the 
Old World? How are American ideas and interests of government to be 
affected by European ideas and institutions? This I consider the great 
American question of the times, and one which may well occupy the 
thoughts and attention of the Senate and of the country. I could only 
desire that the inquiry had an abler expositor than I may hope to be. And 
I would that I had an opportunity of going into the subject under circum- 
stances less embarrassing and more propitious and favorable to a hearing. 
I regret, I deplore, that I have neither the ability nor the favorable occasion 
for doing justice to a subject which appears to me to be one of the highest 
importance to the future condition and fortunes of this country. 

I have said that the great American question of the day is. how is this 
country to be affected by the present condition of Europe? 

What, then, is the position of Europe, at present, in relation to the great 
principles and questions connected with the organic forms of government? 
Sir, I propose briefly to sketch the recent changes, and, what I consider to 
be, the present condition of Europe in these important aspects. 

You may remember, sir, that general tranquillity and confidence in the 
established order of things had reigned in Europe for a considerable period, 
when the sudden and unexpected overthrow of Louis Philippe, followed 
in rapid succession by popular and insurrectionary movements in Italy and 
the German States, in Austria and Hungary, roused the world from its su- 



pineness. The simultaneous movement of the liberals in so many States, 
and their partial successes, inspired the lovers of freedom every where with 
hopes of the most beneficent results, and led to the greatest excitement; 
but the public mind, with the receding tide of republican successes, re- 
gained its composure without its confidence. The unsettled condition of 
affairs, and the power of the contending factions in one great country, still 
held the public mind in suspense, and all awaited the solution of French 
politics; perceiving that upon that, would depend, in no small degree, the 
future quiet of the Continent. That solution came like a clap of thunder 
to unexpecting ears, in the coup (Vttat of the 2d of December. The ex- 
citement was now intense, and expectation continued on tiptoe, until the 
question could be solved — which had no clue in the knowledge or conjec- 
ture of this country — whether the French people, appealed to as they were 
with every external show of freedom of choice, would condemn or approve 
the daring usurpation of Louis Napoleon. While in this suspense, lo! 
tidings came that seven of the eight millions of the adult male pop- 
ulation of France had approved and sanctioned the decree which abolished 
the Republic, and confided to the arbitrary will of one man the power of 
reconstructing their government. Thirty-six millions of freemen thus 
voluntarily surrendered their liberty, and gave their powerful sanction to 
the creed that popular sovereignty was not a safe element in the organic 
form of a government! 

If the event of the 2d of December was startling, these last tidings were 
absolutely astounding; and men's minds were set to work to account for 
the strange and unexpected result — scarcely yet doubting that the next ar- 
rival of a steamer from abroad would bring accounts of a spontaneous and 
successful uprising of the partisans of freedom in France which had hurled 
the daring usurper from power. But, astonishing as were the events I have 
just recounted, the fact — the most amazing to me, at the time, of all that 
have transpired since the expulsion of Louis Philippe from his throne — re- 
mains yet to be stated. Contemporaneously with the first report of the 
event of the 2d of December which reached this country, came vague, and, 
at the time little credited, assurances that the movement of Louis Napo- 
leon would not only be successful, but that the peace of France and of 
Europe would be rather consolidated than disturbed by its success! And 
now, after four months, after more than a hundred' days have passed, 
fresh assurances reach us from so many reliable sources to the same effect, 
that it would seem a species of madness any longer to resist absolute con- 
viction on that point — assurances the more incredible from the first, when 
we consider that they were accompanied by advices that the King of Prus- 
sia, following the lead of France and Austria, was proceeding as fast as he 



8 

durst to remodel the constitution of his government upon a basis which ex- 
cluded every vestige of republicanism. 

What ; then, sir, is now the recognised and well understood position of 
the nations of Europe — the cradle and still the great nursery of modern 
civilization — in regard to popular rights and free government? Let facts 
speak the answer. If what we hear be true of Prussia, then the four great 
Powers of the Continent are modelling their governments upon the basis 
of absolutism — upon the theory that popular sovereignty or popular control 
to any extent in the affairs of government, directly or by representative as- 
semblies, is incompatible with peace and order, and utterly subversive of 
the securities and blessi%s of civil society. Sir, a new order of things has 
arisen which decrees the abolition of the very symbols of liberty. Every 
monument of the transient existence of former republics — every inscription, 
every memento of former freedom, is to be razed to its foundations, effaced 
and obliterated, so that no trace shall remain, no tradition be allowed to 
go down to posterity of the time when republican forms had found a foot- 
hold in Europe. 

Thus, sir, the great and imposing fact stares us in the face, that the con- 
tinent of Europe has reverted to the old ideas of monarchy and absolutism ; 
and liberty lies prostrate, discarded, and dishonored. 

And what, I repeat, as still more surprising, is, that the opinion prevails, 
founded upon the most reliable sources of information — the entire mercan- 
tile class, the stock market, the great capitalists upon the London Ex- 
change and the Paris Bourse, the money kings, who have their Argus eyes 
fixed upon every part of the continent, and their secret agents in every 
cabinet — not only that republicanism is down, but that there will be no 
further commotion, no war, and that this state of things is permanent in 
Europe! 

Can this be true, Mr. President? Can it be true that the spirit of liberty 
is extinct in Europe; or, if existing at all, so feeble, so exhausted, so dead, 
as to give no signs of future awakening; no promise of an early resurrec- 
tion! and this, too, in the middle of the nineteenth century, and among 
the most civilized people of the earth ; this, too, in the full and meridian 
blaze of science, moral and physical — in an age which has been emphati- 
cally and universally proclaimed and recognised as the age of progress, to 
distinguish it from all antecedent ages and generations of the world! 
Sir, at such a time as this, in such an age as this, among a people so civil- 
ized, to affirm that a new order and condition of things has arisen which 
rejects and repudiates the idea of popular rights or sovereignty as incom- 
patible with the ends of society, and that this state of things is permanent! 
4)r affirm that republicanism is effete — fast becoming an obsolete idea; that 



9 

its merits have been weighed in the balance and found wanting; that the 
handwriting has appeared upon the wall, announcing confiscation and ban- 
ishment to the partisans of freedom! Why, I wonder that some gentle- 
men do not start from their seats in this chamber upon the announcement 
of so stupendous a fact upon any credible authority — and yet the authority 
is the highest known in the range of human testimony. 

And this is the advancing spirit of the age: this the denouement , the 
final result of sixty years of revolution, of agony, and of blood, in the 
cause of liberty in Europe! 

But can it be true that the cause of republicanism is lost — is irretrievable 
in Europe? I have given you the testimony of the stock market and the 
mercantile classes. I will now give you, if possible, a still more reliable 
authority — the official and public declaration of the late ministry of Great 
Britain, reaffirmed by the present. I refer to the declarations to be found 
in the late debate in the British Parliament, which arose upon the dismis- 
sion of Lord Palmerston from the Ministry. The whole debate is signifi- 
cant of European ideas and prospects upon the question of free institutions. 
But I will not detain the Senate by referriiig to any part of it, except the 
concluding sentence of Lord John Russell's speech, the public avowal of 
the facts and sentiments of which, by a Prime Minister of Great Britain, 
must be regarded as one of the most remarkable circumstances of the pre- 
sent century. I read from the London Times: 

" I have the happiness to say that the relations of peace exist between this country and for- 
eign nations in the highest degree. I trust they may continue to do so; and, while I deplore 
events which have passed on the continent of Europe — events which, I fear, were but the too certain 
consequences of the revolution of 1848 — I do trust that, by peace and civilization, by the intelli- 
gence which is daily pouring in on us, by the inventions made to improve the condition of man- 
kind, liberty shall be at length introduced and established, and that, with religion, it'shall govern 
the hearts of men, and produce happier days to mankind." 

Thus has the knell of liberty in Europe been tolled, its obsequies pub- 
licly celebrated, and its fall wept; with what sincerity I do not pretend to say. 

England — aye, sir, England — the proclaimed champion of freedom in 
Europe ! England, that symphathizes with the diffusion of constitutional 
governments on the Continent ! England, that has been so often depicted 
as the flaming sword which guards the eastern gate of the Eden of liberty ! 
England acquiesces in the new order of things ! What a commentary 
upon the announcement so frequent of late of English sympathy with 
America and with freedom throughout the world. 

The English Prime Minister, then, t?°usts that, by the increase of know 
ledge, by civilization, and the inventions of the age, liberty may at length be 
introduced — may re-appear upon the Continent, and bring happier days to 
mankind! 



10 



Let us pause here, and speculate a moment upon this great fact, which 
marks the progress of civilization in the nineteenth century. Let us pause 
and consider the conclusion, and the causes which have led to it, of the 
strange eventful story of a contest which may be said to date further back 
than the first French revolution-going back even to the middle of the 
sixteenth century, when the human mind, awakened, after a slumber of 
ages, to some conception of the civil as well as of the religious rights of 
mankind. It is said, that the last scene of the fifth and last act of the great 
drama of freedom in Europe is brought to a close. But I ask again can 
it be true that the contest is over? I call to mind another fact m addition 
to all I have before stated in confirmation of the conclusion that all is 
over. A late number of the United Service Journal, a periodical of ap- 
proved authority, states that the armies on the Continent number four 
millions of bayonets. And they are arrayed on the side of despotism. 
It is true, that some of the more ardent friends of liberty contend that the 
conclusion does not follow from this fact, that the contest for freedom 
is at an end. They allege that it has only yielded for a time to the 
overwhelming physical force brought to bear against it. But, on the other 
hand, it is strongly maintained that one of the results of the progress of the 
age is, that the bayonets of Europe have been taught to think; that they 
have come to regard themselves as a part of the people from among whom 
they are recruited, and that they will no longer be, as in former times the 
blind instruments of their employers in making war upon popular rights. 
The idea, too, has been often proclaimed, in tones of exulting confidence, 
that public opinion has become stronger than the bayonet. All this may 
be true, and is certainly very beautiful in theory; but, from the complexion 
of recent events in Europe, it would unfortunately seem, that not only 
the thinking bayonets, but that public opinion, also, has rejected popular 
intervention as an unsafe basis of government. 

But a few years ago, it must be admitted, that the current of republican 
ideas and aspirations was tending rapidly to undermine all the monarchical 
institutions of Europe. Now all is reversed. Men's minds, perplexed 
and confounded by recent events, naturally go in search of some factor 
theory which may account for the change. Some take the view that there 
is no great principle or maxim, in morals or government, so fixed and es- 
tablished as to be free from the influence of fashion, the love of novelty- 
or beyond the reach of those changes in sentiment and opinion which are ob- 
served to occur at intervals and periods of greater or less duration, according 
to circumstances, among mankind, even upon subjects the most interesting 
to their own happiness and welfare. Some bold speculators have gone so 



11 

far as to affirm that all religious forms and creeds wear out by time and 
pass away j that weariness and lassitude are inheritable qualities; that they 
descend from generation to generation; and that, in the lapse of ages, the 
human mind seeks, by a natural impulse, to throw off old ideas and senti- 
ments upon all subjects of mere faith and speculation. 

The theory is more plausible when applied to governments than to reli- 
gion. The passion for civil liberty is common to all, except the governing 
classes, in any stage of civilization. The passion for personal freedom may 
be said to be universal; yet how often has it happened in the history of the 
world that these passions have yielded to other and still stronger and more 
controlling influences? There have been periods in the history of Eu- 
rope — especially in the ages which immediately succeeded the overthrow of 
the Roman power and civilization, and even in later times — when personal 
freedom afforded no security to life or property. It was in such distracted 
times that whole villages, and the rural population of whole districts and 
provinces, voluntarily became the serfs and bondmen of some powerful 
suzerain or chief, who had the power to protect them from the general 
license and plunderings of the times. And so, sir, I can readily under- 
stand that a state or condition of things may arise in any country when, by 
the madness, the turbulence and violence of faction, the restraint and 
sanctions of law and government may become so relaxed that a whole peo- 
ple, however attached to the cause of free institutions, may seek repose and 
protection in the embraces of despotic power. So it has been in times past 
in many memorable instances, and so it is likely to be in the future. 

The passion for civil liberty, strong and universal as it is, has been 
known again and again to yield to one that appears to be even stronger than 
that — the love of national glory. There is still another sentiment common 
to the mass of mankind that has had a powerful influence in human affairs, 
and one which, aside from religion, many regard as the strongest in the hu- 
man heart — I mean the sentiment or spirit of loyalty to a chief, or the heirs 
of his name and renown . The servile worship of eminent men — of men who, 
by some sparkling or dazzling qualities, or achievements in military or 
civil affairs, have fixed the popular admiration — is kindred to it. If we 
would calculate the strength of this sentiment of loyalty, we have only to 
consider the errors, the blunders, and sometimes even the crimes, which it 
often overlooks in a favorite. We, sir, can bear witness to the intensity 
and force with which this passion, or the kindred one, has operated in our 
own times and in our own country in those party conflicts which have become 
so fierce and formidable. Presuming upon the strength of this sentiment, 
a dictatorship is sometimes assumed in the direction of affairs, only less 
offensive to a manly independent spirit than the actual usurpation of all the 



12 

the powers of government. I need not say, what every one at all read in 
history must know, that the public liberty has often been a victim to this 
passion. 

But neither the love of novelty , nor the influence of fashion, nor the pas- 
sion for national glory, nor the sentiment of loyalty, nor the servile worship 
of eminent men, nor any law of change, nor all together, are sufficient to 
account for the revolution which must have taken place in the opinions of the 
people of Europe within the last few years, if what we have heard be true, that 
the arbitrary authority assumed by (he Continental Powers is founded in pub- 
lic opinion. The revulsion in public sentiment, the reactionary feeling, must 
indeed have been strong and overwhelming, as, in so short a time, not only 
to have reversed the rapid and fitful current of republican ideas, but the 
more steady, deep, and broad one which has been setting in so long in 
favor of constitutional monarchies. 

There is, there must be, still some great fact behind. There must be 
some solution of this enigma; some latent or patent cause for a change so 
adverse to the hopes and anticipations which cheered the last moments of 
so many illustrious martyrs to the cause of freedom within the last three- 
score years. 

One great preliminary fact I assume as certain and unquestionable. It 
is that, what we, in this country, call the bone smews of society — the great 
and respectable class of industrious and thrifty agriculturists, artisans, trades- 
men, shopmen, and the merchantile classes generally — have come to the 
conclusion that popular forms of government cannot be maintained on the 
Continent of Europe in sufficient force and authority to accomplish the 
great ends of society, the repression of internal disorders, and the security of 
life and property. Whence this great change in the sentiment and opinions 
of the populations of Europe after so along a period of conflict and suffering? 
There can be but one answer to this question, but one solution to this 
enigma. It is, it must be, the ultraism — the wild and visionary schemes 
and theories of society and government, of liberty, of universal equality, 
which have been avowed and taught by the great popular leaders of 
the revolutionary and republic movements on the Continent of Europe, 
and the sanguinary excesses of many of their followers. These are 
the men, and these the doctrines, which have brought obloquy upon 
the very name of republicanism throughout Europe. The have envel- 
oped a noble cause in a cloud of prejudice. They have frightened the 
timid by the exhibition not of the horrid spectre of anarchy, but the living 
demon. They have disgusted and alarmed the stout-hearted and more re. 
elective advocates of free government; put arms into the hands of the ene- 



13 

mies of freedom more formidable than bayonets, and sent despair into the 
hearts of all who were ablest to maintain its cause. 

Let it not be said that the wild and fanciful theories of a few revolutionary 
leaders, and the excesses of some of the more reckless of their followers, 
cannot and ought not to be supposed to have had so great an influence upon 
the great body of sincere and republican patriots in any country, as to have 
seduced them from their principles. No ; 1 agree, that the dreams of the deliri- 
ous disciples of any creed, or the excesses of the desperate and abandoned, who 
are always ready to avail themselves of every popular commotion to gratify 
their appetites for plunder or revenge, neither ought nor can be supposed to 
have had any great influence on the considerate and steady champions of 
a great reform; but, unfortunately, those wild and destructive theories of 
social and political reforms, which have struck terror into the hearts of the 
liberals of Europe, have not been confined to a few, or to a small class of 
zealots. German philosophy, for a series of years, has combined with the 
popular literature of the day to ingraft upon the minds of their excitable 
and imaginative readers all over the continent the same mischievous theo- 
ries. New, strange, and bewildering theories of the destiny of man and of 
human society, and the perfection of which both are, by nature, susceptible, 
have quite unsettled the faith and confidence of tens of thousands in all 
existing institutions, both social and political. The followers of the new 
philosophy, every where, perceiving that their theories of universal happi- 
ness and equality are not likely to be realized in any of the known or exist- 
ing forms of society or government, become the advocates for the abolition 
of both. Denying all imperfection in the nature of man, and seeing that 
the Christian religion stands in the way of their reforms, they are compelled 
to abandon their own cherished theories, or to renounce that also. And 
hence we observe that the policy of reconstructing imperial and arbitrary 
governments on the continent of Europe embraces the altar as well as the 
throne. 

The great curse of Europe of the present day is, that the theories and 
doctrines of the champions and advocates of liberty and republicanism have, 
all along, proceeded upon the same error which rendered all the philosophy 
of the schools of antiquity abortive, and, for the most part, utterly useless 
to mankind. They all proceed upon abstractions. All their theories of 
society and government, all their ideas of liberty and equality, and the forms 
they would institute to secure them, are founded upon some preconceived 
notion of what they conceive ought to be right and proper, without the 
slightest reference to any practical test — to any thing that has been proved 
to be sound and practicable in the past history of the world. Sir, to get 
right, and to be able to construct true and practical systems of government, 



14 



they must first reconstruct their system of philosophizing; they must recon- 
struct their own theories and adapt them to human nature as they have seen 
it developed in the past, as they see it displayed at the present day. They 
must adapt them to the races of men as they perceive them to exist in all 
their varieties and differences of capacities and propensities, without troubling 
themselves about the question of original unity or equality. They must 
found their theories upon experience and not upon fancy. They must 
come to understand that the competency of man for self-government is not 
a simple or universal truth, but that it is a complex and conditional propo- 
sition, which may be true of one and the same people at one stage of their 
progress and not at another; and as to races, they must come to learn that 
every race has a civilization peculiar to itself, and physical and mental 
faculties of various grades of capacity for improvement and development, 
as all history testifies. In short, they must adopt the method of reasoning 
and theorizing pointed out by the great founder of modern progress, Bacon° 
When they shall have done this, they will have taken the first step towards 
a true progress in the science of government. Discarding all unmeaning 
cant and catch terms about liberty and equality, they must come to know 
that there is a liberty, that there is an equality which is agreeable to na- 
ture, a liberty and an equality resting on a basis that will stand, and that 
all else is spurious, delusive, and mischievous. 

I trust, sir, I may now be allowed, without taking my final leave of Eu- 
rupe, to pay a short visit to America— America, always open and exposed 
to every disease or contagion, moral and physical, which originates in a 
foreign atmosphere. We see it proclaimed through the columns of a thou- 
sand presses in this country that the spirit of democracy is necessarily pro- 
gressive. I ask pardon— for I intended to divest myself as far as possible 
of every partisan view and feeling in delivering my sentiments on this great 
subject; but I am unable to proceed fn my argument without allusions and 
the use of terms which may seem to have a partisan cast. We are told 
that reform in this free country is a laggard— that it lingers far in the rear 
of the advancing spirit of the age. Sir, it is proclaimed through the same 
channels to the people of this country, that too much of the old anti-demo- 
cratic leaven still lurks in our constitutional forms and in our legislation. 
By a more circumscribed party, but still widely diffused over the country, 
and of no insignificant influence, our institutions are denounced as being 
oppressive and unjust to the natural rights of mankind, alien to liberty, 
upholding social forms which admit of no equality of position or of happi- 
ness; that there is no true fraternity; no freedom, such as the spirit of the 
age and the progress of civilization demand. 

Whence this type of democracy in this country ? No man can mistake 



15 

its paternity. It is European born. It is the same type of democracy 
whrch has undone the cause of liberty in Europe; and its mission in this 
country can never be accomplished but by the ruin of liberty in America. 
Does not every one know that the most popular and leading champions of 
the cause of republicanism and democracy in Europe regard with positive 
contempt — nay, that they turn away with disgust — at the very mention of 
American republicanism. They scorn to receive our American, home- 
bred ideas of liberty. Why, say they — You have no philosophy — you have 
no true and loft}'' conceptions of the destiny of man and of human society; 
you are far in the rear of European enlightenment upon all these subjects! 
Such are the arrogant pretensions of the European champions of liberty. 
Some of the more reckless among them have the hardihood to declare 
that our whole system is false, and that if it cannot be reformed they are pre- 
pared to destroy it; that it is a model which misleads the friends of freedom 
abroad, and that it had better be pulled down than upheld in error! 

I should like, if I had time, to say a word about this age of progress. 
That it is an age of increased population, wealth, and power in this coun- 
try, and of increased knowledge and science every where, no one doubts. 
That is all for good. But I should] like to know in what consists that 
progress of the age which is announced as the basis of reforms in regard to 
political institutions. The highest moral institution on earth, except reli- 
gion, is that of government. What is the progress of the age in the science 
of government? It is an experimental science. New revelations of facts 
lay the ground- work for reforms and improvements in government. What 
is that progress in America ? We have seen what modern progress has 
done in Europe, in this department of science. But I ask, what progress 
has there been in America ? Have any new and better forms of govern- 
ment been discovered, any new principles brought out by experience better 
calculated to advance and secure the happiness of mankind, than those 
devised and digested by the architects of our revolutionary period 1 What 
new theories have been developed in the lapse of the last half century 
which show an advance in the science of government? Has our legisla- 
tion become wiser and purer — founded in more patriotic ideas, and better 
calculated to advance the interests and happiness of the people? Are our 
public functionaries, executive, legislative, or judicial, of a higher order of 
intellect, of enlightenment, of patriotism, and of fidelity to their great 
trusts? Is there less corruption, waste, profligacy, and favoritism in the 
public administration ? And, to notice some of the ordinary tests, has 
crime diminished ? Are frauds less prevalent in trade ? Are life and 
property more secure ? Is the administration of justice more pure, able, 
and impartial? Is the spirit of personal ambition less pestilent? Is the 



16 

spirit of faction less turbulent and mischievous ? And in regard to the 
great distinguishing characteristic of a people competent to self-government, 
and to uphold a republic — loyalty to the law, is that more prevalent and 
abounding? But I cannot dwell longer upon-this subject? I fear, sir, 
that this idea of progress is to be our ruin. Ninety-nine out of a hundred 
of those who talk of it, (not in this chamber, of course,) do not discriminate 
between change and progress. We are all progressive. There is a pro- 
gress in time, a change in every thing. We are not what we were. We 
cannot remain what we are. We must go forward. But a true progress 
in public morals and in society, which may justify material changes of 
government in this country, I wait the proofs of. 

Mr. President, I have occupied more time in these general views than I 
intended. I must revert now to the main subject of inquiry; that is, how 
are we to be affected by the late changes in the condition of Europe ? If 
what has been said, and what I have shown to be the general opinion, be 
true — if the present state of things in Europe is permanent — then let me say 
to you, what in my judgment will be the result. In that event, and 
under recent circumstances in this country, will be found the germ of a 
lasting hostility on the part of the Powers of that continent against the Re- 
public of the United States; and, sir, we shall see, that the next great war 
which is to fill the world with its desolations, will be a war between the old 
continent and the new — between the Old World and the New World — be- 
tween the ideas, the principles, and the interests, and the passions of Eu- 
ropean or Eastern civilization, and the ideas, the principles, the interests, 
and the passions belonging to the new and more vigorous civilization of 
the continent of America. This is the natural order of progress in the civiliz- 
ation of the world. The jealousy of all Europe has been effectually 
roused and excited by the late and vast accession to our territory, fore- 
shadowing in its future the profits and resources of the trade of the gor- 
geous East. As long as this Republic shall continue united and prosperous, 
it must continue to be a standing rebuke to despotic power. It will haunt 
the dreams of the enthroned masters of Europe like the ghosts of murdered 
princes, and they can never be at heart's ease until they shall have made 
one great and united effort to crush this disturber of their repose. Princi- 
ples of government so diverse — adverse interests, so deep and imperishable — 
cannot exist on continents between which the barrier of an ocean is removed 
by modern inventions, without bringing jealousies, rivalries, hatreds, and 
collisions, which, sooner or later, must result in war — fierce, protracted 
war, which can only be terminated by the mutual exhaustion of the parties, 
or the final triumph of one over the other. 

A voice whispers me: Where will England be in a contest between the 



17 

despotic Powers of the Continent and this Republic? What guaranty 
have we that she would be disposed to interpose her broad shield between 
America and her assailants ? Will kindred race and language be a guaranty 
of the friendship of England ? Never, sir. as long as the story of the Rev- 
olution shall be handed down; never, while the brightest pages of our his- 
tory shall still be those which record our triumps over British valor and 
British domination. The dire and lasting hate engendered by family feuds 
is proverbial; and the lasting enmity of England is decreed by an inexora- 
ble law. 

But may not kindred institutions be a guaranty of her alliance and pro- 
tection ? No, sir. The throne, the altar, the aristocracy, the whole gov- 
erning race, including the wealthy middle classes of England, have as great 
a horror of republicanism, and of the levelling theories of the fierce dem- 
ocracy of the Continent, as the Czar of Russia himself. Nothing can be 
more unmeaning, hollow, and deceitful, than what we hear so often an- 
nounced, through some of our own journals, of the desire of Great Britain 
to draw more closely the bonds of amity between the two countries. Neither 
the cause of liberty, nor any interest in the diffusion of constitutional mon- 
archies, has been the basis of British policy in this age, or in any other, in 
her relations with the Continent or with America. These were not the 
causes of her involvment in the last general war of Europe. They were 
purely and simply the protection of her own interests and her own safety. 

May not her trade, may not her profitable commercial connexions, with 
the United States, bind her to our cause against the Powers of the Conti- 
nent? 1 still answer, unhesitatingly, no. If there is one fact in the future 
history of the world that can be foretold with greater certainty than any 
other, it is the great conflict, not now, but soon to be, between great Britain 
and the United States for the empire of the seas, and the command of the 
trade of the world. Instead of becoming our ally in a war with the des- 
potic Powers of the Continent, Great Britain would have cause to exult; 
and let me say that she has at this moment cause to exult, and her far-see- 
ing statesmen doubtless do exult, in the dawning of a state of things which 
may place all the Powers of the Continent, even Russia, heretofore in her 
policy friendly to the United States, in an attitude of lasting hostility and 
resentment against- this Republic. Great Britain may see, in recent events 
on the Continent and in this country, causes equally new and unexpected, 
which may prolong her power and her ocean dominion to a date in the 
future far beyond all former hope or calculation. She would rejoice to see 
our commerce cut up, and our youthful energies paralyzed and crushed 
under the weight of a European combination. She may stand off, to be 
sure; but if the Powers on the Continent will only pursue a pacific policy 



• 18 

toward her; if they will keep their ports and commercial marts open, on 
liberal terms, to her trade and manufactures, they will have her free con- 
sent to model their governments upon principles of the purest absolutism ; 
they may extinguish every spark of liberty among their own subjects, and 
crumble into dust every republic on the globe. True, England may clamor 
for some concession to popular rights; she may write strong diplomatic 
notes; she will bluster in a thousand ways to delude and conciliate the lib- 
erals at home, but it will be all mere vapor; and the whole farce will be 
played off with a perfectly good understanding between her and her 
neighbors. 

As I stated upon a former occasion, Great Britain, for the present, avails 
herself as fully as she may of all the advantages she can derive from the 
weak points of her cousins in America. She has discovered that a little 
well-timed flattery goes a great way with them. She is now carrying on a 
courtship with them most satisfactory to herself. By a profession of the 
principle and a practice of the semblance of free trade, together with some 
relaxation of her navigation laws, she has quite overcome the jealous pru- 
dery of America. In the mean time, compliments to the ingenuity and 
invention of Brother Jonathan in the manufacture of agricultural imple- 
ments, and, with ill-concealed chagrin, to his skill in the construction of 
sailing vessels, are showered in profusion. I hope I appreciate as I ought 
the liberal and valuable features of British institutions; and, above all, do 
I appreciate the well-earned renown of Englishmen in every department of 
human effort — in the arts and sciences, and especially those which contri- 
bute most to advance the happiness of mankind, exceeding all Grecian, all 
Roman fame. I must ever honor the land, as I ought, which has given 
to the world a Shakspeare, a Bacon, a Milton, a Hampden, a Newton, a 
Watts, an Arkwright, with a hundred other names illustrious for their 
genius and inventions; but, with all this, I regard the embrace of Great 
Britain as death to American development. Her approaches are like the 
serpent's, with honeyed and fair speeches on her tongue, but with venom 
and destruction in her heart. My blood boils within me when I perceive 
the signs of her successful enchantment; every little guileful compliment to 
American skill and enterprise, carefully and ostentatiously heralded in the 
columns of the ablest public journals of the country, as though we could 
not feel assured that we are entitled to respect until it is yielded by English- 
men; as though the policy of England, artfully yet systematically pursued, 
now as always, was not to undermine, and finally to pull down, the main 
pillar in the fabric of our power — the Union. No, sir; if it shall ever be 
our misfortune to be engaged in a struggle with the great powers of conti- 
nental Europe, we can have no reliance upon the friendship and support 



19 • 

of Great Britain. In such a conflict we must stand or fall, submit or con- 
quer, contending single-handed ; relying alone upon American valor and 
American resources. 

I have now, Mr. President, closed what I proposed to say upon one 
branch of the important subject I have undertaken to discuss. I am aware 
that I have pursued a train of tho.ught and argument which may not inter- 
est Senators generally; but other and different aspects of the subject remain 
to be noticed, and which 1 think of sufficient importance to claim the fur- 
ther indulgence of the Senate. 

Notwithstanding the apparently overwhelming weight of authority upon 
which the opinion is founded that the tranquillity of Europe will not be dis- 
turbed, at least for a long period, such is the singular complexity of affairs 
on that continent, so many facts and circumstances exist leading to a con- 
trary conclusion, that some doubt and apprehension may well be felt upon 
that point. If such apprehension may be entertained upon plausible grounds, 
none will deny that they deserve our serious consideration. 

Nothing, I admit, can be more hazardous to him who would be thought 
far-seeing in affairs, which I do not pretend to be, than to predict, with any 
certainty or confidence, what will be the result, immediate or remote, of 
the present condition of the States of Europe, or of any change or events 
likely to occur in any of the more powerful among them. How utterly 
delusive, not to say worthless, all such speculations, even the most ingeni- 
ous and profound, especially in relation to France, may prove to be, we 
have only to reflect that at this moment, and while I am speaking on the 
subject, by the passing of a single breath of air, the going out of a single 
spark of life, the snapping of a single cord, the newly-invented machinery 
by which a great people are moved and governed, may be exploded, and 
the fires of a conflagration kindled which may envelope all Europe. Won- 
derful and mysterious Providence ! that the destiny of a great nation — it 
may be of a whole continent — should be so intimately entwined with the 
fate, the life of one man, and he of no antecedent position, significance, or 
renown! Nothing can be more strikingly characteristic of the age in which 
we live than this single fact. It may well be regarded as ominous ; and 
teach us that, rationally, nothing in society or government can be regarded 
as so fixed and well established as to defy convulsion and overthrow. The 
complication of causes has recently become so curious and intricate as to 
make all reasoning from them to effects abortive. We can neith &t perceive 
nor comprehend the infinite variety of minute yet operative fibres and ele- 
ments of which the moral tissue is compounded. The faculties of the 
greatest intellects stand rebuked, mortified, and confounded by rapid, suc- 
cessive, and unexpected developments. Yet speculations and conjectures 



w 20 

as to the future, however extravagant or visionary they may be, will still 
occupy the thought and imaginations of men. 

The more sanguine believers in the increased knowledge and civilization 
of the age, as sure guarantees of the ultimate triumph of liberty, basing 
their calculations on the fact that the late changes in Europe are palpably 
retrogressive, affirm that the spirit of liberty on the continent of Europe is 
not extinguished; that it is only entangled for a time in the toils of the 
hunters, and that it will speedily break the vain fetters, and rouse itself to 
greater energies than it has ever yet displayed in combating its enemies. It 
is this class of speculators on the signs of the times who affirm that, at this 
moment, Europe is on the verge of the great war of opinion so often fore- 
told — a conflict between antagonistic principles of government — the one 
supporting free and the other despotic forms. 

There is another class who go still further in their conjectures, and sug- 
gest that Europe is probably upon the verge of a still more terrible and 
formidable war, a war between classes — a more sanguinary, destructive, 
and wide-wasting war than the w T orld has ever seen — a war between the 
poverty-stricken masses on the one side, and the proprietors by purchase or 
inheritance of the soil, and the depositaries of all other descriptions of 
wealth, the accumulations of industrial pursuits in a period of a thousand 
years, on the other side. There have been wars of ambition and conquest, 
wars between races, wars of religious creeds, wars for civil and religious 
liberty; and, for any thing we can foresee, the blood of many more such 
wars may yet stain the earth. Nation will continue to rise up against na- 
tion, race against race, and the tide of victory will yet ebb and flow on 
many a battle-field, on which freedom shall contend against oppression. 
Rut th^re are several causes which will prevent or postpone for ages either 
this last great conflict which threatens the civilization of Europe, foretold 
by some; or the solution of the problem propounded by others, who main- 
tain that civilization, whenever it reaches a certain stage in any Of the great 
divisions of the globe, must finally yield to the great law of change — to the 
inevitable destruction and decay, the seeds of which are planted in every 
form of society known in the history of the world. The civilization of any 
one race of people, like the nations they compose, and like individual man, 
it is said, has its ages, its culminating point, after which it must gradually 
decline and be lost to view, or only live in history. But though the civil- 
ization of western Europe may have reached its culminating point; though 
its populations and the races of which they are composed may be verging 
to decline; and though in numbers overstocking the land, as they do, yet, 
just upon their eastern borders, there is still that great store-house of na- 
tions — of fresh and vigorous races, to replenish and reinvigorate their de- 



caying energies — to preserve, to perpetuate, and it may be to advance, their 
civilization. The discovery of this new world of ours, and the facilities 
supplied to immigration by modern inventions, will mitigate, if not remove, 
the great evil of redundant populations. And so I think there is no reason 
to apprehend the catastrophe of that war of classes, or of a declining civiliz- 
ation in Europe, which some of the desponding prophets of the times have 
suggested as certain or probable. 

While I cannot give myself up to the belief that the cause of civil liberty 
in Europe is irretrievably lost, and while I am reluctant to come to the 
conclusion that there will be no immediate or early effort, by the more 
rational friends of freedom, spontaneous or concerted, to resist the arbitrary 
principles upon which the great Powers of the Continent are proceeding to 
model their governments; to throw off the hateful incubus; to break the 
chains, ere they are riveted, which are forged to bind fast their liberties; yet 
I must confess that, in the intelligence which reaches us from the other side 
of the Atlantic, I see nothing to encourage the expectation of such a move- 
ment; and so I conclude that there, will be no war on that ground. 

But I come to a different conclusion from those who are of opinion that 
the quiet which now reigns upon the Continent of Europe is permanent, 
or that there will be no war within any short period. There are too many 
causes of discord, too many jealousies, too many rival interests, too many 
outcast, yet intriguing and influential dynasties, too many great armies 
ready to take the field, and, with all, the never-dying ambition and thirst 
for dynastic and national aggrandizement, to allow any strong faith in the 
hypothesis of continued peace. 

In coming to this conclusion I «k> not forget the opposing testimony 
borne by the stock market and the mercantile classes. Nor am I unmind- 
ful of the powerful influence of the purse-hoWers of Europe, the great 
moneyed capitalists, upon the questions of peace and war. Nor do I forget 
the plentiful professions of peaceful intentions by the governments most 
likely to disturb the peace. But I regard professions and diplomatic assur- 
ances of very little value. I look to more substantial facts. I look espe- 
cially to the political necessities which may drive a great nation to war. 
Notwithstanding all the assurances we receive from abroad of permanent 
tranquillity, that there still exists some uneasiness in Europe on that sub- 
ject, we have only to recur to the fact that all the States of that Continent 
are looking carefully to the condition of their national defences; and while 
they all profess a willingness to disarm, they are increasing their arma- 
ments, both by sea and land. In addition to this, when we consider that 
here are now four millions of bayonets ready to be put in motion, and thai 



22 

the different maritime Powers can put afloat two thousand ships of war, 
who shall say that there is no ground to apprehend a war in Europe? 

I am aware that there are many causes, existing in great force in Eu- 
rope, to make peace desirable. The enormous public debt, exceeding in 
the aggregate seven thousand millions of dollars, under which the States of 
Europe are weighed down, may restrain the temptations to war, as it would 
undoubtedly cripple their military energies; but this is an argument which, 
like a two-edged weapon, cuts both ways. To pay the interest on this 
debt, and sustain public credit, takes the bread from the mouth of labor, 
engenders discontent among the thrifty and industrious classes, and desper- 
ation among the impoverished. Besides, four millions of armed soldiery, 
though their swords are unsheathed, must be fed and paid; and hence a 
constant temptation to the larger Powers, to try the chances of war, and by 
forced contributions to throw upon their neighbors the burden of their support. 
The only remedy for this state of things is a general disarming by the great 
Powers, which their mutual jealousies will not permit. 

There is a more potent influence still, that may possibly exist, to restrain 
the Governments of Europe, and compel them to keep peace. The repub- 
lican ideas and fierce democratic spirit which have so deeply infected their 
populations of late, and which have been the key to their policy for the last 
four years, may yet exist in sufficient force to control their councils. The 
snake that crept into the palaces of kings may be scotched, not killed. 
The popular volcano which burst forth in 1848 with such fury may not be 
burnt out; it may only slumber, and the vibratory motions of the "Mountain" 
may impart fears of another irruption and outpouring of the burning lava. 
If this should be so, all causes of discord, all mutual jealousies, all ambitious 
schemes, will be suspended, until this common danger to the internal peace 
of the States of Europe sh*li pass away or cease to be formidable. But I 
have thrown out these suggestions upon an assumption which I see little 
reason to justify. The danger of popular commotions appears already to 
have passed, at least for some years, and I recur to the opinion already ex- 
pressed, that the promise of a continued peace will not be realized. 

France holds in her hands the issue of peace or of war. If she is quiet, 
all may be quiet. But can she, will she be quiet? She cannot. Louis 
Napoleon must disturb the peace of Europe or fall. It is upon France that 
the world now fixes its gaze; and with whatever seeming composure the 
result of her present anomalous position and the development of her future 
policy may be awaited, it is impossible but that the most callous and fear- 
less statesman of the times must expect them with some solicitude. It is 
true, this second Napoleon may b.e suddenly cut off. It is true, there may 
be a revulsion of public sentiment so universal as to drive him from power. 



In either of these events France may become once more the prey of fac- 
tion, and relieve the apprehensions of her neighbors, and of all Europe, by 
exhausting her energies and resources in rending her own vitals. But if 
Louis Napoleon shall survive the perils which attend him in the initiative 
operations of his government, then, I say, France will become aggressive. 
If there was nothing in the singular spirit, and, to me, mystical genius of 
that daring man, who has seized into his own hands the construction of a 
government for a great people, leading to the conclusion that he would 
become aggressive, and plunge his country into war, he is still under a po- 
litical necessity to make war. It is true that in doing so he may but rush 
upon his fate. Be it so. He cannot pause in his career. He must give 
employment to his four hundred thousand soldiers, or thev will divide and 
assimilate with the factions or fraternize with the republicans. At all 
events, to prevent these dissensions in his army, he must have the control of 
large means, and they can only be acquired by levying contributions upon 
the resources of his neighbors. He wants, too, the prestige of military 
renown to still further concilitate and consolidate the esteem and affections 
of Frenchmen. 

This remarkable man has hitherto, in his policy, his tact and strategy in 
civil affairs, evinced many kindred qualities, and trod with striking fidelity 
in the footsteps of his illustrious relative. Doubtless, like him, he con- 
siders himself the child of destiny; born to carry out all that was projected 
by the great Napoleon: imperial power attained; the boundaries of France 
enlarged to the Rhine; the kingdom of Italy reconstructed and restored; the 
pride of England humbled, or her power broken; and a barrier interposed 
to the ambition of Russia, or a close league with that great Power for an 
equal partition of the empire of the world ! 

The great Julius fell by the daggers of domestic conspirators; and his 
nephew, Octavius, a stripling, unknown to fame, after a sanguinary strug- 
gle with the leaders of opposing factions, with the aid of the distractions 
of the times, and an adroit coalition with Antony, succeeded to the 
power of his illustrious uncle. The great Napoleon fell by a combina- 
tion of all Europe against him; and his nephew, Louis Napoleon, after 
a longer interval of changing dynasties and contending factions, has suc- 
ceeded to his power; a man who seems to combine all those qualities of a 
profound dissimulation and strategy in civil affairs, with the additional ad- 
vantage of personal courage, which enabled his prototype, Octavius, to 
succeed in what was at first regarded a desperate and hopeless enterprise. 
In all history can there be found so many striking coincidences in the lead- 
ing features, incidents, and fortunes of two great families; in the circum- 
stances of two great political revolutions — one of which changed the destiny 



24 

of ancient civilization, and the other, it may be, is destined to change that 
of modern Europe. The parallel fails in the persons of Nicholas and 
Antony. Nicholas is a very different personage from the pleasure-loving 
Antony; but still he may not disdain an alliance with the only Power that 
can curb his ambition in the west of Europe; and he may choose to share 
equally, if he cannot win universal dominion. On the continent of Eu- 
rope there are now, in truth, but two great Powers, France and Russia — 
or at most three, if Prussia be so considered. Austria lies prostrate and 
paralyzed by the variety and implacable antipathies of the races which oc- 
cupy the provinces and dependencies of her empire. Prussia must be more 
or less fettered by the jealousies of the petty sovereignties in her neighbor- 
hood, and the democratic spirit which may still infect her subjects; but the 
great German nationality, including Prussia, may be conciliated by a tri- 
partite partition. The provinces of the lower Danube, and all Turkey, 
with the prospect of further acquisitions in Asia, may suffice Russia. Eng- 
land may be intimidated, or her power broken, by reviving the continental 
policy of the great Napoleon. 

But I have not time to pursue these speculations as to all the various 
combinations which may arise out of a state of war, or their consequences. 
It may be asked, why I give such prominence to France in holding the 
issues of peace and war? Is she so powerful; is she so formidable; or will 
she have the audacity, under present circumstances, to disturb the peace of 
Europe? I answer, that France, under a favorite chief, has not only the 
courage to commence a war, but the power to become formidable to her 
neighbors. She is formidable not only from her thirty-six millions of in- 
habitants, and her compact territory, but from the gallant, excitable, and 
glory-loving character of her population — the French being now, as they 
have always been, the most warlike race of Europe, or of the world. 
Twice has France, in the earlier periods of her history, rolled back the tide 
of conquest which threatened to change the destiny of Europe; twice has 
she, single-handed, protected its religion and its civilization — once on the 
plains of Chalons, where she met and overthrew Attila and his host of 
three hundred thousand warriors, collected from the hordes of Asia; a se- 
cond time under the lead of the famous Charles Martell, when she checked 
the conquering career of the Moslem power, in the neighborhood of Tours. 
Twice has she been upon the point of subjecting all Europe to her domin- 
ion — once under Louis the Fourteenth; and again, at a period so recent 
that it seems only of yesterday, under the auspices of the great Napoleon. 
Twice, in her career, has she succumbed; and then only when a world 
rose in arms against her. Such is France. 

If Louis Napoleon has the sagacity and the ambition which I attribute 



25 

to him, he will neglect no expedient to still further attach the French peo- 
ple to his fortunes. The French have become essentially democratic in 
their spirit and feeling; that tendency must be counteracted by counter in- 
fluences; that spirit, strong as it is, has yet, again and again, yielded to a 
stronger passion — the love of national glory. Under the intoxication of 
that passion, twice have the French people surrendered their liberties; and 
there will not be wanting stimulants or occasions to rouse and keep alive 
that passion. The pride of all true Frenchmen was humbled on the field 
of Waterloo. That wound to her national vanity remains to be soothed or 
avenged. Louis Napoleon may bide his time for that; he may find some 
more feasible undertaking in which to flesh his maiden sword. If he does 
not find it among his neighbors, he may look to another continent. Africa 
presents too barren a field for splendid achievements. He may even be 
tempted to cast his eyes upon America. The recollection of the haughty 
and dictatorial menace yielded to by Louis Philippe, under which the last 
instalment of the French indemnity was paid, still rankles in the bosoms of 
Frenchmen. But I beg pardon. I know how wild the idea will be con- 
sidered; but I think it is not extravagant to suppose that, backed by jeal- 
ousies and resentments of the other Continental Powers towards the United 
States, Louis Napoleon, perceiving the defenceless condition of our ex- 
tended ocean frontier, and counting on his superior naval force, may seek 
to win renown by seizing and laying under contributions our rich and 
flourishing cities upon the Atlantic coast. Nay, he may be tempted still 
further, and seek to indemnify France for the loss of empire in America in 
the cession of Louisiana, by attempting the permanent conquest of the Pa- 
cific coast. I repeat, that 1 am aware that this may be regarded as an ex- 
travagant and irrational conjecture; but who, at this day, and after all the 
wonders of the times, will say that it is incredible ? But I must cease these 
speculations upon this prolific subject. 

Senators may inquire: To what practical conclusion I design to apply all 
that I have said upon this branch of the subject ? In the first place, if, upon a 
review of the whole ground, the position I have assumed, that at no distant 
day — in six, in twelve, or at most in twenty-four months — a war will be 
kindled in Europe upon some pretext, or of some character or other, be 
well founded, then I undertake to predict that the United States will sooner 
or later be drawn within its vortex; and, if this hypothesis shall seem to be 
supported by plausible reasons, then a further practical inquiry will be, 
what should we do to be prepared to meet the exigency. 

In some of the views presented in the course of my remarks, it will be 
recollected that I supposed a state of things might exist in which Europe 
would leave the United States no option as to the question of peace or war- 



26 

a state of things which would lead to a hostile combination of all the des- 
potic Powers of the Continent against the Republic of America. That 
may never happen. 

But should that war of opinion, so long predicted; that war of principle, 
that great conflict between the free and the despotic forms of government — 
should such a war as that arise in Europe, do you think, Mr. President, as 
a sound practical statesman, and with your experience and observation of 
this country, and its present population — do you suppose that if such a 
conflict should arise in Europe — a conflict involving the settlement of prin- 
ciples which may have universal ascendency for centuries — that we should 
be so unimpressible, so indifferent, that we could not be drawn into it, de- 
spite all calculations of policy or of interest? Do you conceive, sir, with 
your knowledge of the heart of this country at this day, that a cold and 
sordid calculation of mercantile profit, that the devotion to Mammon, or 
any more laudable service, would be so faithful and intense as to restrain 
even those reckless passions and emotions which belong to our nature, to 
say nothing of freezing up all generous and noble impulses, tempting us to 
enlist on the side of freedom in such a strife ? No; the time has never been, 
when, in any one country in Christendom, mind meets mind in fierce con- 
flict upon principles which touch nearly the social feelings and interests of 
men, the mental strife would not become contagious and move the sympa- 
thies of every other. But let the clash of arms add to the excitement, and 
the blood will be stirred and fired in its inmost recesses. Let the tidings of 
such a conflict, such a war of opinion, but reach onr shores, and, my word for 
it, whatever may be the conclusions of mere policy, Young and Old America 
alike will be swayed to and fio by the passions natural to the occasion, like 
the trees of a forest swept by a strong wind. Little time, I ween, would be 
allowed for weighing the counsels of the illustrious and immortal sages of 
fifty years ago. Nor are the feelings and calculations which sway the twenty 
millions of freemen of this day the same which controlled the two or three 
millions of fifty years ago. All change is not progress; but the law of 
change, under changing circumstances and conditions, is inexorable. We 
have our destined career to run. Nations cannot stand still until the point 
of maturity and manhood is passed; as yet we go forward; and we will go 
forward; whether for good is another question. Our discretion may not, 
however, be put to the test of a war of opinion in Europe at this juncture. 

But if a war should spring up in Europe of the old-fashioned kind — a 
war of aggression on one side, and defence on the other — a war of ambi- 
tion and conquest, with the feelings of jealousy and of resentment which 
may exist on the part of the nations of Europe against the United States at 
this time, do you suppose that such a war can rage in Europe for one year, 



27 

especially if any of the great maritime Powers be parties to it, without 
compromising the peace of this country? Our commerce and navigation 
are too extensive and widely diffused, the general competition for the trade 
of the world is become too fierce to allow any escape from a collision with 
the belligerents of Europe. Have you not seen, sir, in the last few years, 
how difficult it is, even in times of peace, to digest the insults which the 
war vessels of Great Britain, presuming upon their superior naval power, 
occasionally offer to our flag? But let there once be war, and you will 
soon perceive the difference in the calculations and feelings which control 
the people of this country and of this generation, and those which controlled 
them forty or fifty years ago. Since that period we have grown six or seven- 
feld greater in population and resources; and, true to the characteristic 
traits of our lineage, we have grown in conceit of our puissance still more. 
Neither our temper nor our prudence improves with the changing circum- 
stances of our condition and resources. Let there be a war in Europe, and 
the first open violation of our neutral rights, the first breach of the accustomed 
courtesies to our flag, will be instantly retaliated, and thus the war would 
be begun, all unprepared as we may be. And let me say to the people 
of this country that, with the feelings which exist probably at this moment 
in Europe, any of the maritime Powers of that continent would be nothing 
loth to accept the issue of war thus presented. The weak points in our 
condition, our six thousand miles of inadequately protected sea-coast, to say 
nothing of other causes which may paralyze our energies, are as well under- 
stood abroad as at home. And let me say further, that, under existing 
circumstances, it will be rare good fortune if, in any European war in which 
we shall be engaged, we shall not have the sympathies of every other 
Power of that continent enlisted against us, except only such as may be 
strengthened by our interposition. 

Before I conclude, it may be well to turn for a moment to those eviden- 
ces of that sober discretion, that steady adherence to home interests, that 
reverence for the teachings of our ancestors, that conciliatory and forbearing 
spirit towards foreign powers, so much relied upon to shield us from the 
wasting and ruinous folly of foreign wars, exhibited in the last few years. 

It is true that in the matter of the Cuban invasion, the intervention of 
England, and the return of the Spanish Consul to New Orleans, our Gov- 
ernment has pursued a policy singularly modest, as respects any conceit of 
our own pretensions, and in the highest degree forbearing and conformable 
to a peace policy. 

But let us see whether we have manifested equal discretion and forbear- 
ance, and an equally conciliatory spirit, in regard to the recent disorders on 
the continent of Europe. 



28 

It was but natural that our sympathies should be deeply moved by the 
gallant struggle of the Hungarians in their attempt to maintain their na- 
tionality and to assert their liberty and independence. It was but just and 
natural that when the Austrian oppressors were driven out of Hungary, 
and trembled on the verge of defeat under the walls of Vienna, we should 
have beheld with no little indignation the intervention of the Czar of Russia 
in arresting the victorious career of Hungary. Nor was it possible that we 
should not be deeply moved by the atrocious cruelties alleged to have 
been — and, as we suppose, were — perpetrated by Austria against the cap- 
tive Hungarian chiefs. Nor could it be supposed that the popular feeling 
would not find expression through public journals, public meetings, and 
various other channels of communication to the world. Nor could it have 
been expected, under such circumstances, that, through the same media, 
the popular ideas and theories of government and human rights in general 
should not be manifested in violent invectives and denunciations against the 
despotic principles and policy of the Austrian and Russian governments. 
All that might have been expected, and could not have been a ground of 
complaint. 

But these expressions of popular feeling and principle did not stop there. 
One of the most distinguished statesmen of the country — and I refer to 
this in no personal unkindness to the honorable Senator, (Mr. Cass) — 
brought forward a resolution to suspend all diplomatic intercourse with one 
of those Powers, (Austria.) And afterwards, another Senator, who has 
attained considerable distinction in the country, moved a resolution, which 
was acceded to by the Senate, calling upon the President to interpose his 
good offices for the release of Kossuth and his companions in exile from 
their captivity in Turkey, and to tender to him a national vessel to bear 
him and his suit to America. Kossuth and his companions were accord- 
ingly released, and ostentatiously borne, under the national flag, to our 
shores, where he was received with triumphal honors. But this did not 
suffice. After we had thus, and to this extent, interfered in the affairs and 
quarrels of two of the great Powers of Europe, we proceeded still further 
to provoke them by a breach of national courtesy — such a breach as is 
never forgotten or forgiven, however the revenge may be delayed. The 
man whom we had already so highly honored, was at the time, and is now- 
regarded by the Emperor of Austria the prime mover, the living, animating 
principle of an internal convulsion which shook his throne to its founda- 
tion, brought humiliation upon his house, attached a stain to the proud 
escutcheon of the Caesars that can never be effaced ; the man who seeks to 
be to the Czar of Russia what Sir Sidney Smith sought to be to Napoleon, 
his evil genius — dedicating his life, his genius, and Ins eloquence to the 



29 

disparagement of his character — preaching a crusade against his policy, 
his power, and the principles of his government; the man who, at the same 
time, is proclaimed to be at once the martyr and the apostle of liberty in 
Europe— this man, by a vote of the Senate — their attention being called 
to him in a message of the President of the United States himself — was 
invited to the seat of the National Government, entertained at the public 
expense, and by a formal reception in open session of the Senate, had hon 
ors heaped upon him which the proudest citizen of the ancient common- 
wealth of Rome might not have declined. A greater insult to those two 
great monarchies, Russia and Austria, you could not have inflicted by an 
open declaration of war. How idle, how ridiculous, after this, to be 
gravely debating and considering whether we shall proceed to express oiu 
sympathy with the fortunes of Hungary, or to protest agaiust the interven- 
tion of Russia in her affairs by further resolutions; or as to what shall be 
their forms; unless, indeed, we desire still further to provoke and insult 
Russia and Austria by a moie formal declaration of our implacable hatred 
of them. 

Now, sir, from these proceedings we may form some estimate of the true 
character and extent of that moderation and sober discretion of the Ameri- 
can people and of their representatives, of the preseut times and generation, 
so confidently relied upon to keep us in the faith and in the counsels of the 
fathers of the Republic. Truly, we have before us a most notable and 
instructive example and illustration of the progress of the age. 

But did it never occur to those who have been most forward by these 
proceedings to give to the world some memorable expression of thgir devo- 
tion to the cause of the equal rights of mankind, and of their abhorrence 
of all such despotic governments as that of Russia, that it was proper to 
consider whether the system of Russia, in the present condition of her 
population, may not be the very best that could be devised to advance their 
civilization and prepare them for ultimate freedom? Did it never occur to 
them to consider with what caustic severity the Czar of Russia might retort 
their criminations of his government and their pompous declaration in favor 
of liberty and equality, by a slight reference to our own practical construc- 
tion of the theory of those rights 1 

But, in our proceedings in relation to Hungarian affairs, we have not 
only departed from the wise policy laid down by our forefathers, in giving 
affront to Russia and Austria, but we have also compromised the interests and 
the safety of the Sultan of Turkey. Who knows but that at this raomenl 
he may be the doomed victim of the resentment of those two great Powers ? 
Have we ever considered that, in our officious intermeddling in the affairs 
of Europe, we have incurred obligations and responsibilities — obligations 



30 

of duty, of honor, and of self-respect, which can only be fulfilled and 
discharged — exposed ourselves to insults, which can only be retaliated, by 
war? I reason not upon the chances that, in the present condition of Eu- 
ropean affairs, it may be the policy of the two great Powers whom we have 
so deeply aggrieved to waive their resentment against Turkey, and to 
maintain amicable relations with us for the present. I am for acting upon 
the maxim, which holds good in private and individual affairs as among 
nations — he who voluntarily incurs a responsibility — he who deliberately 
inflicts an insult, should, if he is wise, lose no time in putting himself in 
an attitude to meet the consequences, whether they come or not. 

The last great practical conclusion to which I have intended to direct my 
remarks is, that in view of the present posture of European affairs; in view 
of the prospect of a war, at no distant day, in which the United States may 
be eventually involved ; in view of the obligations and responsibilities we 
have already incurred ; in view of the honor, dignity, and duty which 
attach to our position in the family of nations; in view of the wisdom, pru- 
dence, and forecast which should distinguish a great model republic in 
providing against the contingencies of the future ; in view of our own 
safety; in view of the best method of preserving the blessings of peace; in 
view of the policy of reviving and cementing a truly national spirit and 
sentiment throughout the land, we should lose no time in making every 
essential preparation to put forth the energies and resources of the country 
in any emergency which may arise, in such manner as to successfully 
fulfil and discharge all our obligations, all our duties ; and which, if we 
omit to do, we may justly incur the reproaches, and, it may be, the curses, 
of the present and of future generations. 

What are those preparations ? What I propose is : 

First, to look well and narrowly into the operation of our financial sys- 
tem; to provide the proper securities for an ample revenue against the con- 
tingency of war, and the consequent interruptions of foreign trade; to give 
every encouragement within the competency of the National Government 
to the improvement and extension of internal commerce; and especially to 
establish a direct overland communication, by the construction of a railway 
between the valley of the Mississippi and the Pacific coast. 

Secondly, to give to the spirit and resources of the country their full 
efficiency and development, it becomes our duty to guard with increas- 
ed vigilance against all causes of sectional irritation, and to eradicate, 
as far as possible, from the national councils and policy, the seeds of sec- 
tional strife, as we would the deadly nightshade from our grounds ; not by 
proscription and denunciation, but by cultivating a spirit of mutual forbear- 
ance and conciliation. 



/ 



31 



Thirdly, to strengthen our national defences; to place them upon a foot- 
ing which may not leave the country exposed, in the event of war, to 
shameful and mortifying disasters ; and especially to add largely to our 
military marine, a measure demanded by our extended foreign trade, and 
the manifest inadequacy of the present naval establishment to give to it 
that protection and security which is necessary even in time of peace. 

From a statement, the most authentic and reliable I have been able to 
procure, of the present naval armaments of the States of Europe, it appears 
that Great Britain can put afloat a fleet of 678 effective war vessels of all 
classes — 150 of which are propelled by steam — with an aggregate comple- 
ment of 18,000 guns. The French navy consists of 328 effective war ves- 
sels, with an aggregate of 8,000 guns. Russia has a fleet of 175 effective 
war vessels, with an aggregate complement of 6,000 guns. The propor- 
tion of war steamers in the navies of France and Russia I am not able to 
state upon any reliable authority; but from statements I have seen, and 
which I attach some credit to, the war steamers of the French navy may 
be set down at one hundred. That was the number authorized by the 
Government of France in 1S45. 

I will not extend these remarks by any notice of the naval establishments 
of the inferior maritime powers of Europe; but I am sure the Senate will 
take an interest in the statement I am able to make of the navy of the 
United States, which consists of 76 effective vessels of all classes, with an 
aggregate complement of 2,250 guns; and of these vessels 6 are propelled 
by steam! • 

Such is the naval force that we must rely upon for the protection of the 
honor of our flag, our commerce, which penetrates every sea accessible to 
American enterprise, and an ocean frontier of 6,000 miles in extent! 

Such is the beggarly and miserable preparation of the means of maritime 
warfare, either offensive or defensive, with which we proceed to provoke 
and insult the great powers of continental Europe! Why, sir, one single 
fact ought to be sufficient to awaken in the minds of the people of this 
country a lively apprehension of the perils of the condition in which we may 
be placed. Our communication at this moment with California and Ore- 
gon, for all purposes of effective supply and defence, is by sea, requiring 
an average voyage of four thousand miles by the Isthmus route, and of six- 
teen thousand miles, and not less than six months time, if the passage be 
made around Cape Horn, or through the Straits of Magellan. It will thus 
be seen at a glance that either of the maritime powers of Europe, whose 
navies I have alluded to, could, in one or two months time, so effectually 
block up our only reliable communication with California and Oregon as 



32 

to defy all the resources of this country short of a year or two's prepai 
to re-open it. 

But that is not the most lamentable and mortifying aspect of the condi- 
tion of affairs in this country. At a period of time when all the eastern 
world may be regarded as trembling upon the verge of convulsion and 
change; when principles most vital and momentous to mankind threaten 
to become the subject of universal conflict; at a period when we maybe 
exposed to hostile a combination of all the great Powers of Continental Eu- 
rope; at such a period as this, under such circumstances as these, what are 
the prevalent ideas, and passions, and cares which occupy American politi- 
cians and statesmen? The passion for place and position, the idea of pow- 
er! These are the ideas and passions which control every great interest in 
this couutiy; every branch of public policy, internal and external, foreign 
and domestic commerce, hie extension and improvement of internal com- 
munications, the public defences; all, all are become but secondary con- 
siderations, neglected or moulded into shapes and forms subservient to the 
purposes or adapted to the exigencies of the great, the eternal conflict which 
goes on as to whose hand, or what clique, or faction, or party, shall be made 
the depositary, from time to time, of the power and patronage of the Govern- 
ment. Even the slave question could not escape the predominant and con- 
trolling passion of the times; originally stimulated into being and wrought 
up to its present complexion by the same interests, it is indebted for all its 
present disturbing vitality to the necessities and exigencies of these factions or 
parties, if you please to dignify them by the name, including, if you choose, 
the party to which I belong. 

I would not do so great an act of discourtesy or injustice to the honorable 
members who grace this chamber by their presence, and enlighten it by 
their counsels, nor to the politicians and statesmen of the country generally, 
as to deny that there are man}'- individual exceptions to the general aver- 
ment I have made as to the passions and influences which control public 
affairs. But, with this explanation I repeat, that all political calculations 
and speculations verge to one end. One idea reigns triumphant through- 
out the land — the idea of power! And this, too, at such a period in the af- 
fairs of the world; this, too, in the American Republic! Well may we in- 
voke the spirit and the counsels of Washington to inspire us with wisdom, 
and kindle once more in our bosoms the flame of revolutionary patriotism. 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 898 456 ^ 



H0LL1NGER 
P H8.5 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



